| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. John D. Taylor: The hon. Gentleman continually refers to the peoples of Ireland, but of course he will recall that any referendum could well apply to the peoples of these islands. Part of the negotiations will be about the relationship between the peoples of these islands, as paragraph 1 of Command Paper 3232 says. It is not simply the peoples of the island of Ireland. It is the peoples of these islands.
Mr. Canavan: Clause 4 of the Bill refers to
- "obtaining the views of the people of Northern Ireland on any matter relating to Northern Ireland."
The Bill will have no jurisdiction in the Republic of Ireland, so if we are to put into effect paragraph 26 of the White Paper it makes sense to have statutory consultation between both Governments on the content and timing of the referendum. I take the right hon. Gentleman's point that there may well be a case for extending some form of consultative referendum to all the people of the United Kingdom. I know that some hon. Members take that view on constitutional matters, but if one examines the agreements that have been signed recently by both Governments on the right of self-determination and the definition of consent, it is clear that it will be sufficient to confine the democratic test to the entire island of Ireland.
I commend my amendment to the House.
Mr. Cash:
I think that I have made my point already, thanks to your indulgence, Dame Janet, in an intervention that I made earlier. There is a potentially serious point here. It is the inconsistency and perhaps even conflict between clause 4(1), which refers to the views of the people of Northern Ireland, and the requirements in clause 4(6), which deal with the question of consent by reference to section 1 of the Northern Ireland Constitution Act 1973.
My hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) has made an important point in amendment No. 84. I suspect that it would be extremely
undesirable to find that someone attempted to upset the arrangements that have been made in pursuance of those sections if there were an inconsistency--and there clearly is between the words "views" and "consent"--that led them to say that it was ultra vires or in some way out of order.
Mr. Corbyn:
I put on record my support for amendment No. 100, as proposed by my hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk, West (Mr. Canavan). If there is no consultation with the Government of the Republic of Ireland on the wording, timing and content of the referendum proposals, it is very unlikely that there will be a successful outcome from the peace talks--and we want them to come to a successful conclusion.
I fail to see why there should be any objection to consulting the Government of the Republic when it is obvious that the whole problem with Ireland is the division, the relationship between Britain and the Republic of Ireland and the future of the six counties. Holding a referendum with similar questions--multiple choice questions that include the same options within them on both sides of the border--seems to me to be the best way to bring this to a successful conclusion.
The right hon. Member for Strangford (Mr. Taylor) intervened on my hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk, West and said what about a referendum in the rest of the United Kingdom, or perhaps he said that there should not be one in the rest of the United Kingdom. Essentially, the issue has to be resolved by the peoples of Ireland as a whole and that can bring about a permanent peace. If he is serious about a referendum in the whole of the United Kingdom, he might find that the result will be that Britain should not be so involved in Northern Ireland or perhaps not involved at all. I am not so sure that a referendum would bring him the result that he would like to see.
That is not the content of the amendment that has been put down in our names. We are saying that the Secretary of State, before presenting any referendum questions to the people of Northern Ireland, should, as a matter of requirement, talk to the Government of the Republic of Ireland in the hope and expectation that a similarly worded referendum could take place on the other side of the border.
Mr. Illsley:
The Opposition would like some clarification of the amendments and of clause 4. We take the view of the hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Cash) that clause 4(6) prevents the Secretary of State from holding a referendum on the constitutional future of Northern Ireland unless it is in accordance with the Northern Ireland (Constitution) Act 1973. Therefore, we look on the holding of referendums under clause 4 as giving the Secretary of State the opportunity to hold referendums periodically in Northern Ireland on topics other than the issue of constitutional change.
Perhaps the Minister could clarify that and tell us the purpose of clause 4. We look on it not as a clause which authorises a referendum on the constitutional future of
Northern Ireland arising out of those negotiations, but as one which gives the Secretary of State the power to hold a referendum on issues that may arise from time to time--perhaps on the use of violence, as was suggested by the SDLP recently.
We regard some of the amendments that have been moved as unnecessary and others as unworkable. Inserting the word "shall" in the first line of clause 4 would require the Secretary of State to hold referendums from time to time regardless of whether there was an issue on which to hold one. I cannot envisage circumstances in which there would be no issue on which to hold a referendum. Nevertheless, amendment No. 128 would place a duty on the Secretary of State to hold referendums periodically, and we see no need for continually holding referendums.
Obviously, the most important referendum to be held in relation to Northern Ireland would come under the provisions of clause 4(6). The issue is that of obtaining the consent rather than the views of the people of Northern Ireland. The issue of consent brings us back to subsection (6). As we see it, clause 4 is intended for the Secretary of State to obtain the views of the people of Northern Ireland on specific subjects. If the word "consent" is written into clause 4, the Secretary of State will be under a duty to hold referendums in Northern Ireland, each of which is to give consent, and issues may be put to a referendum that do not require the consent of the people of Northern Ireland but simply an expression of their view.
I refer back to the subject raised by the SDLP when it said that perhaps the issue of the use of violence or whatever might be put to a referendum in Northern Ireland. That does not require the issue of consent to be agreed on; it simply means that the people of Northern Ireland can express their view.
The issue of consent in any respect has been laid to rest by both Government and Opposition; both have committed themselves repeatedly to the view that no constitutional change will take place in Northern Ireland unless it is with the consent of the people of Northern Ireland expressed through a referendum. I regard that as being enshrined in the various documents that the Government have produced in the past, and it is not relevant to clause 4.
Worryingly, amendment No. 125 would give a duty or a power to hold referendums on any agreement between the Government and the Irish Republic. I read that to mean that we might hold a referendum in Northern Ireland on the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985, and we could be bogged down in holding a referendum on agreements or treaties that have been in position for the past 10 years and whether they are agreed. It will not take the process forward if we begin to look backwards rather than forwards to the negotiations.
Amendment No. 125 would also limit referendums to constitutional issues, which I do not envisage as the remit of clause 4. I hope that the Minister will respond on that point and confirm that clause 4 is simply to obtain expressions of the will of the people of Northern Ireland rather than their consent on major constitutional issues.
We cannot agree with an amendment that would make the results of any referendum binding on the Government. It is a well-known rule of the House that Parliament cannot bind its successors. It would not be right or proper
for the Government to enshrine in legislation here the fact that they would hold referendums to be binding on themselves and any future Government.
Amendment No. 83, tabled by the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire), also refers to clause 4. He wishes the decision in a referendum to be taken on a majority of those entitled to vote, rather than the majority of those people voting. We cannot agree with the fact that abstentions will be counted as people voting against in any such referendum.
Mr. Trimble:
I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way on this point. We are reaching a crucial moment in defining a central part of Labour party policy with reference to what might happen after the next general election. The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the amendment tabled by the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) draws its inspiration from the legislation of the last Labour Government in the Scotland Act 1978 and the Wales Act 1978. In view of the Labour party's proposal to introduce within its first year in Government legislation regarding devolution in Scotland, is the hon. Gentleman announcing that there will be no referendum along the same lines as provided for by the last Labour Government? It is a crucial issue.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |